Re: Possible enhancement : replace view ?

Hannu Krosing wrote:
> On Wed, 2002-08-14 at 04:08, Emmanuel Charpentier wrote:
>
>>Dear all,
>>
>
> ...
>
>
>>Of course, I am aware that view definitions aren't just stored, but that
>> a lot of rewriting is involved before storing the actual execution
>>plan. Modifying a view definition would entail re-processing of other
>>view definitions. But so is the case with the modification of a table ...
>>
>>What do you think ?
>
>
> I'm trying to propose a scenario where
>
> 1. The SELECT clause defining the view is preserved
>
> 2. DROP of undrlying table/column will _not_ drop the view, but just
> mark it dirty
>
> 3. Using the view checks for the dirty flag and if it is set tries to
> recreate the view from its plaintext definition.

I might be dense, but why not try to recreate it directly after the
table/column modification ?

> ---------------
> Hannu
>
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?
>
> http://www.postgresql.org/users-lounge/docs/faq.html